Skip to main content

About your Search

20121121
20121129
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
is going to have a pretty easy sail through the confirmation, john kerry or somebody like that. it's unusual somebody we don't know is going to be nominated is working the u.s. senate this hard. is this an ultimate political genius move by the obama white house? are they thinking they're going to take this into a fight for senate confirmation? >> day two of this pr campaign to face the critics on the hill. senator corker is who we're going to have the opportunity to -- rice will have the opportunity to meet with him at noon. in advance of today's meeting, "she always delivers the party line, the company line, whatever the talking points are." is this an example, though, of rice facing critics -- explain the type of diplomacy she would need to display if she's going to go into negotiations with china? it's different than, you know, facing your foes on the hill when you're facing those from a different country. >> right. i think frankly it's inexplicable on the republican side. i do think this is a prelude probably to rice being nominated. and i really don't see how the republicans w
cain referring to john kerry in case he was -- in the event he was nominated as secretary of state and susan collins in addition to the comments we have played said she would support john kerry as secretary of state. how much is about that and not about benghazi? >> i don't know what it's about. i'm not aware of evidence this suggesting that ambassador rice manipulated any data for a political purpose. what i am aware of and this is based on reporting of sources and "wall street street," is that the intelligence provided to the president as part of his pdb said what she repeated on national television and arguably it's the same intelligence that would have been provided to governor romney receiving intelligence briefings in the final stages of the campaign and perhaps i have believed that's why he stayed away from the issue in the final debate. so why aren't they saying, we need more information about the cia? we need to know where was the intelligence failure on the part of cia. that seems to me a very reasonable question as opposed to holding responsible she who went on and repeated what t
or john kerry or someone else, there will be questions about a new internationalism, not a liberal intervention that isn't about bombs, bases, intervention and rebuilding america's relationship with the world and dealing with the problems of our time like climate crisis, nuclear proliferation, hunger and how to lead to a global economic policy. it's issues we have not done a good job in dealing with, nor will it. >> the trouble with that, though, is that we actually don't have the money as a result of the choices of the people who would be voting to confirm or not confirm ambassador rice. if you only have the money for the military. the pentagon is well funded. your regional commander could go out. i agree with your critique. the way to get to the source of the critique is not that, you know, susan rice or anybody else doesn't understood what you said. it's to follow the money and give the u.s. the tools. >> shouldn't we rethink where the money goes? one of the reasons diplomatic security is underfunded. the cuts between the state department. the balance between state, diplomacy an
that in any confirmation hearing, whether it's susan rice or john kerry, there will be questions raised about a new internationalism. one that is not a neoliberal or liberal interventionism that isn't about bombs, bases, intervention. but about rebuilding america's relationship with the world and dealing with the major problems of our time, like climate crisis, nuclear proliferation, hunger and how america can lead a global economic recovery. these are issues liberal interventionism has not done a good job dealing with. >> the trouble with that, though, is that we actually don't have the money as a result of the choices of the people who would be voting to confirm or not confirm ambassador rice. if you only have the money for the military solution because the pentagon is well funded and your regional commander has much more ability to go out and act on behalf of the u.s. than the ambassador does. so i agree with your critique, but the way to get to the source of the critique is not that susan rice doesn't understand, but it's to follow the money and -- >> but should we rethink our priorities
. i think what it may show the president doesn't want to nominate john kerry to be secretary of state. he thought he had first term. now it looks like he may get the defense department as a consolation prize which is frightening. the real point, it's not simply the paper trail of these talking points. the administration as a whole including the white house spokesman, including the president himself on multiple occasions was following a narrative that the benghazi attack was caused by the mohammad video. there is nobody in the government who believes that except the president and knows right around him. the real question is knowing what people knew in those first days after the benghazi attack, who was it that made the decision they were going to explain it that way. i would ask susan rice between 9/11 and your appearance on those five sunday talk shows, did you talk to president obama? did you talk to the national security advisor? did you talk to valerie jarret or david axelrod? follow the trail but look at the bigger picture. >> here is the biggest picture. the guy who made this vid
, but unlike say over the last two losers, john mccain and john kerry, he doesn't have a senate seat to go back to. he doesn't have a big base in the party that was with him before he got the nomination. so, maybe he's returning to the life he has ahead which is one more personal and focused on family than politics. >> it's no question this is one nominee who is not going to remain a leader in the party. >> he would have to engage in dramatic actions to be a leader in the party. i say never rule it out. i thought he liked the lifestyle he had before he ran, loves his kids, grandsons, the homes they own. while he grapples with the meaning of his loss he's going to be happy building that southern california mansion and spending time with the kids and also trying to figure out if he does have a place in public life or simply a retired grandfather with a lot of grandchildren he loves. >> and as the party begins to move on, we hear about jeb bush from his son, the fact that jeb bush may be running and jeb bush actually chastising marco rubio for some of the comments that he made in iowa. >> don't yo
as secretary of state. and, of course, waiting in the wings, john kerry, who we understand the white house will nominate to be defense secretary. i'm told he would accept that post even though he would prefer to be secretary of state. we've got to go but thank you very much. chris cizilla, kelly o'donnell. joining me now is ambassador nicolas burns, former undersecretary of state and ambassador to nato, now with the john f. kennedy school of government at harvard. nick we've been through this before, seen confirmation hearings go off kilter. this is not getting a great start. >> and it's a shame, andrea, because i think these charges against ambassador rice, i don't find convincing. she was simply representing the viewpoint of an entire administration and many of us have been in positions of defending administration's republican and democrat in the past, i have, where you're not out there, you know, just trumpeting your own personal views. you're relying on a collective judgment made ats the state department, the white house, the cia and other places, and she was merely the person represen
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7